guildwarsfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Mantra of Recovery
Anyone happen to know if this skill's effects are "attached" to spells or if they apply while MoR is active only? To put it in clearer terms, consider these cases: A) MoR is active, Spell X is cast, recharges fully before MoR peters out. (Base case.) B) Spell X is case, MoR is activated while X is recharging. C) MoR is active, Spell X is cast, MoR ends before X recharges fully. In case A, the effects are obvious; X's charge time is halved. So far, so good. But what about case B? Is the charge time reduced then, or does MoR not "attach" to spells cast before it was activated? Similarly, case C, does X recharge more slowly after MoR ends, or does the MoR effect remain "attached" to X, regardless? I'll test this on my Mesmer later on, but if anyone has already done these tests, I'd appreciate the information. An acquaintance of mine claims that case B works fine, and he casts MoR after unloading his barrage of spells, but I'm skeptical of this. Any information you can provide would be much appreciated. 149.169.45.144 22:20, 16 November 2005 (UTC) :I think you misunderstand the trigger here. The trigger is casting, not recharging. So, to answer your questions: :a) MoR is active and spell is cast within the time limit, no problem. recharge twice as fast. :b) MoR activated while spell is recharging, no effect. MoR affects the skill recharge time the moment the spell is cast. While a skill is recharging, it is unaffected by MoR. :c) MoR ends before skills recharges. No difference. Again, the trigger is spell casting. So, Spell cast before MoR ends THEN MoR runs out is the same as (a). :d) the boundary cases I tested as well. MoR activated while spell is cast will cause spell to recharge twice as fast. And MoR running out before spell is done casting will not cause a faster recharge. :--Karlos 07:26, 17 November 2005 (UTC) ::You can infer this from what Karlos said, but a simpler explanation is recharge times are set in stone when the recharge starts. Nothing will modify the recharge of an already recharging skill. --Fyren 08:24, 18 November 2005 (UTC) :::I am not sure this is correct. When using Mantra of Inscriptions and Blessed Signet, I find that even if MoI is activated halfway through the recharge, it speeds up the recharge at that point. Perhaps it is not the same effect? This may require more testing or the behavior may have changed in a patch. --RadiKS 06:53, 5 April 2006 (CDT) ::::Inscriptions doesn't speed up an already recharging signet. It's easier to see with something with longer recharge than blessed signet. --68.142.14.86 08:19, 5 April 2006 (CDT) ::Karlos is correct, the stance effect happens if you are in the stance when the spell starts to recharge. ::You can enter the stance while casting a spell and it will affect that spell but if it ends while casting a spell it will not affect that spell. ::You can enter the stance just before you finish casting the spell and enter another stance right after you have completed the cast (once the recharge starts) and it will work as advertised.--Heurist 01:47, 10 August 2006 (CDT) :::Actually, when you sue Mantra of Recovery after you've casted a spell, it will recharge faster. Try it. Blaze 11:39, 15 May 2007 (CDT) ::::It won't. --Fyren 23:09, 15 May 2007 (CDT) :::::A lot of my builds use MoR, and I can assure you, it does. Wouldn't know how to prove it, cus I can't make an ingame vid, but try it yourself.Blaze 06:55, 16 May 2007 (CDT) ::::::You can prove it doesn't by trying it yourself. Here's an exact scenario: meteor shower, MoR, and magnetic aura. MS and MA because they both have 60s recharge and because MA has a 0.25s cast. Cast MS, activate MoR (after MS has completed activation), then cast MA. The 0.25s cast of MA minimizes the gap between the spells and since their recharges are the same and long, MoR's effect will be obvious. --Fyren 07:18, 16 May 2007 (CDT) Items that have a "Halves skill recharge" weapon modifier do not appear to further reduce the recharge time. I have tested this with about 200 cast of Empathy (10 second recharge) and a “Halves skill recharge of Domination Magic spells (Chance: 20%)” weapon and a “Halves skill recharge of Domination Magic spells (Chance: 20%)” off-hand item and got 5 seconds recharge every time.--Heurist 01:47, 10 August 2006 (CDT) Game Updates July 13th Lowered the cap for Recharge Reduction to 50%. :If it used to be able to recharge faster than 50% in conjunction with items and/or Quickening Zephyr, it no longer does. 220.233.103.77 02:33, 10 August 2006 (CDT) Random comment: ANet always seems to nerf everything I just start playing. I make a MoR Mesmer: they nerf it... Back to Power Block and Arcane Languor I guess (no comments on skill selection plz =D). Dragnmn talk 20:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Excellent option for energy denial. I've tested this build, and seen a handfull of other energy-denial mesmers who outclass the average "E-Surge" mesmer in terms of damage output and energy removal. With 15 FC, one can keep this up constantly, as well as half the casting time of all spells. I know that at such a rank, attaining the "desired" rank of 14 domination for maxing out energy burn would require a helm + minor rune + maxed domination, and maxed fast casting. However consider this, putting a few less points into the domination, weakening your burn, but throwing in guilt, perhaps diversion (costly though at keeping it up constantly), and diversing into inspiration for drain enchantment and energy tap (1.5 second cast time now), for further energy denial, enchantment removal, and keeping your energy high enough for your other spells, so long as you don't LITERALLY spam your spells to a suicidal rate. If you honestly care to see more of my energy rantings, go check the discussion on Energy Surge. (Other uses posted are dandy too except using it as a secondary for 5 seconds... no.) -Daedric Avenger 50% faster... or 100% faster? Ack, this wording throws me for loops. If the recharge time of spells is halved, then don't spells recharge 100% faster? :Right. The actual effect is recharge times are halved. Ritual Lord has the same wording problem. --Fyren 16:46, 12 September 2006 (CDT) ::Thank you for confirming that for me. I thought I was going nuts for a minute. Tarinoc 19:39, 12 September 2006 (CDT) :Nack, I think you answered your own initial question.Without delving into physics and calc -too- much, the description says 50% FASTER. Faster by definition is an INCREASE in SPEED, ie recharge(inversely proportional to a DECREASE in TIME recharge) and slower meaning a DECREASE in SPEED(inversely proportional to an INCREASE in TIME recharge), in this case an increase in speed equals a decrease in time taken by half of the proceeding spell recharge description with no spirit/enchant effects in place. eg 50% faster .5(x/100) + 1(y/100) One and a Half times as fast, ie 50% faster - NB: By default(ie no spirit/enchant effects), x and y 100(can change due to already in effect spirits/spells). For arguments sake, 100% faster 1(x/100) + 1(y/100) Two times as fast, or 100% faster. ----Confused_Enemy ::Are you suggesting that because they use the word fastER that the description makes sense? If so, then you're also suggesting that something can be 50% fast. While I understand that fastER implies more quickly, this is one of those flubs in the english language where tacking on an ER at the end doesn't take care of business. The description should say 100% faster. Tarinoc 17:15, 28 September 2006 (CDT) :::Your car is fast, my car is faster. There is a comparative made on mine but none to yours. Make sense? On the bye and bye I did mention fast can be used as I have written it to be above and beyond, not as you have done so. C_E ::::Perfect, if your car is fast, but mine is 50% faster, will it cover the same distance in half the time? No, it'll cover the same distance in 2/3 of the time (you're going 100kph, I'm doing 150kph, takes you 1 1/2 hours to travel 150km, but only takes me an hour). That's the problem I think a lot of people have. If I said my car was 100% faster I would expect it to do things in half the time, I think it should be the same here. The way Mantra of recovery works, it would mean that if my car was 100% faster I could teleport any distance instantly. I don't think that's what most people would think, and I think the description of Mantra of Recovery would make more sense if they said 100% faster, or reduces recharge time by 50%. Echokin 00:24, 4 October 2006 (CDT) :::::The formula is very logarithmic and that is where you will fall down by thinking it is not. You think it is linear, it is not. It is very exponential. C_E ::::::It is stupid. Saying something is 50% faster can only mean that the speed of something (ie distance/time) has been increased by 50%. Let me put this another way. Let's use the word 'refill' instead of 'recharge' and imagine you have a glass that is being filled with water. Normally it takes 30 seconds for the glass to become full of water. Now let's say that use my 'turn the tap' ability that reads 'all glasses refill 50% faster', most people would take that to mean that the rate at which the glass is becoming full has been increased by 50%, which could be achieved by increasing the flow of water by 50%. Which would mean that the glass would become full in 20 seconds instead of 30. It would take an increase in flow (or 'refill rate') of 100% to halve the time it takes for the glass to become full, or 'recharged'. I respectfully submit C_E that it is you who is confused and I would like to hear a clearer explanation of your argument. Speed is linear, not logarithmic or exponential (let alone very logarithmic, whatever that means). You might be thinking of acceleration, or something. Regardless, the wording they have chosen is clearly confusing as demonstrated by the existence of this page. It could easily be changed to something that is equally accurate and less confusing such as 'reduces recharge time by 50%'. :::::::I don't think anyone is bothering to disagree because he obviously makes no sense. --Fyren 02:51, 5 October 2006 (CDT) ::::::::Thanks Fyren, I found one guy on the net who agrees with this joker, which put me off. Reminds me a bit of Gene Rays time cube. Anyways, I asked a friend of mine who's 3 years into his Physics PHD and it seems that the wording on this is definitely wrong. The way it's worded, your spells should recharge in two thirds of the normal time. I'll stop now :-p Echokin 18:31, 5 October 2006 (CDT) :::::::::This is supposed to be a knowledge repository, and quite clearly you have sunk to the lowest common denominator. Reserve your judgements and never cast doubt greater than your own shadow. C_E :::::::I agree with what you say, speed is very linear. However, with reference to the wording of 50% faster, x^3 is 300% faster, x^2 is 200% faster, x^.5 is 50% faster. Hope that clears that up. C_E ::::::::Actually, I hate to say it, but you are wrong. In the case of x^3 = 300% it fully depends on the value of x, considering ^ means Exponentiation. Thus, if x = 5, x³ = 125. And I believe you will agree with me that 125 is not 300% more than 5. Exponentiation is not the way to go with linear functions, don't you agree? ;) ::::::::Either way, when measuring increases in percent, x = 100%, 2x = 200%. Since fast'er' is indeed an increase, it is a 100% increase in speed. I see where you're coming from though, since it halves the time, but that doesn't change the fact we're talking about an increase, not decrease. If the description had stated "... decreases recharge time by 50%" it would indeed be a decrease and you would be fully correct. — Galil 22:43, 7 October 2006 (CDT) :::::::::Correct, my bad. I should expand on not just using 2 and 4 as my dummy numbers in future =D C_E ::::::::::Perhaps it would be better if you just didn't use any numbers at all....... 71.82.6.233 04:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC) :Well if the discription said 100% faster, you're spells would have a recharge time of 0 seconds, cause 100% of 1 is 1 so 1-1 is 0 seconds. If a skills discription says its 100% slower the spell will take 2 seconds to cast: 1+1 is 2 seconds.--Want2be 11:05, 27 March 2007 (CDT) ::No. If it says 50% faster that means that the recharge rate is 150%, causing the skill to recharge in 100%/150% = 2/3 of the normal time. If it reduces the time by 50% that would be a rate of 200% and hence double speed. Its a question of reciprocals. The skill acts as if it recharges 100% faster, or in 50% of the time. Same story with the IAS skills. They don't increase the rate by 33%, they decrease the time by 33. Its a confusing jumble with verbs, and Anet doesn't seem to understand it. If you want more clarification pm me in game and I will try to explain this. Kelvin Greyheart 17:53, 27 March 2007 (CDT) When MoR procs This will only proc if you're in the stance when your spell completes casting. It does nothing in all other cases. If you cast meteor shower and put it up immediately after casting, you will still have a 60s recharge. This can be easily verified by doing something like the following: cast a 5s recharge spell, immediately upon completion use a 5s recharge stance like distortion, and then use MoR. You will see that even though MoR is up, the 5s recharge spell's recharge hasn't been reduced at all (by using the 5s stance recharge as reference). --Fyren 15:12, 7 October 2006 (CDT) recharge speed think of it as 100% recharge-50% of the normal recharge time woila- spells take only 50% of the normal time to recharge :We are having people continuously changing the note - it is correct - 50% faster isn't actually 50% faster, it's 100% faster, as it is 50% of the recharge time. ANet continuosuly mistakes rate for speed, leading to confusion. --image:Epinephrine.jpg ~ Epinephrine 12:18, 12 January 2007 (CST) ::100% faster=instant recharge... that can't be right--65.185.196.228 20:05, 21 April 2007 (CDT) :::100% less time is instant. 100% fast''er'' is twice as fast which is the same thing as half the time. --Fyren 22:19, 21 April 2007 (CDT) ::::If no one minds, I'll elaborate on the main page what exactly the skill does, seeing as how it's worded somewhat confusingly. Nitroshockwave 03:25, 15 September 2007 (CDT) A Related Mathematical Note, Not A Discussion of the Skill Proper The skill's properties have been adequately elucidated; this note is really parenthetical, but given that a number of skills' properties are described in terms of percentages, and that a certain number of our fellow players don't seem to understand percentages, with or without ANET's own obfuscations of the subject, maybe this rant will be warranted. The difficulty, aside from ANET's poor and often inconsistent semantics, seems to arise from users not understanding that, concerning percentages, they're dealing with a relative ratio rather than a fixed number value (like, for instance, the cost of a car; whereas we are actually dealing with a RATE in this case, which is not a single variable quantity like a fixed, absolute price). Fyren's comment is correct (as usual) regarding 100% faster: ::100% faster=instant recharge... that can't be right--65.185.196.228 20:05, 21 April 2007 (CDT) :::... 100% fast''er'' is twice as fast which is the same thing as half the time. --Fyren 22:19, 21 April 2007 (CDT) Quite so. Consider the following analogy if this doesn't make sense: I have a battery that can charge in one hour from 0% to 100% power (let's arbitrarily allow 100 units of energy to = a fully charged battery), and by some means I increase the recharge rate to 50% faster (100 units of engery/hr initially, to 150 units/hr). So it will recharge from 0 to full capacity in 2/3 hours instead of 1/1 hour (because the ratio 100/150 = 2/3; 100 units/hr is already intrinsic to the battery, but now we must add 50% of 100 units/hr (50) to that initial value to account for the increase). Similarly, 100% faster would be thus: 100 units/hr --> 200 units/hr, giving a ratio of 1/2, meaning it would take only 30 minutes to recharge. Similarly, 200% faster would result in 100/300 (100 units base + 200 units from 200% of 100), giving 1/3 hour. This should also show that percentages can be misleading; Consider Meteor Shower, with a base casting time of 3 seconds, under hastened condtions (by whatever means): 25% faster = 4/5 the time to cast --> 2.4 seconds (0.6 s reduction) 50% faster = 2/3 the time to cast --> 2 seconds (1.0 s reduction) 100% faster = 1/2 the time to cast --> 1.5 seconds (1.5 s reduction) 200% faster = 1/3 the time to cast --> 1 second (2.0 s reduction) 1100% faster= 1/12 the time to cast --> 1/4 second (2.75 s reduction) These calculations assume no modifications due to fast-casting attribute. These percentages are intentionally absurd, of course, but it demonstrates that something A) might not be as wonderful as it sounds and B)100% is NOT infinite (instant cast)! Only an infinite % (or for practical purposes an absurdly large number)%increase in casting speed would make a spell cast instantly (aside from abilities that do just that, though I'm tempted to believe the game mechanics use an algorithm like (X)% faster to accomodate this, given that meteor shower, using glyph still takes 1/4 second to cast). Dr Needles 08:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC) Test Weekend Awsome. They made my favorite mes elite better. It lasts longer for this "test" weekend. Now its relatively easy to maintain this forever. Anyone know of any other changes? I've been looking when I think about it but this is the first one I've noticed because its really useful to me. Kelvin Greyheart 21:43, 19 January 2007 (CST) MoR+PS+SoA ? Caramel Ni 18:54, 9 March 2007 (CST) Mantra of Recovery + Energy Tap > Energy Drain. :) Also, Mantra of Recovery + Power Drain is some pretty powerful energy management, unfortunately I suck at interrupting though. :( -- BrianG 11:29, 23 March 2007 (CDT) :E-drain is already your elite, and energy tap just sucks. Power Drain is heavily used with this elite tho, same for shame and energy burn(new e-surging).UnexistNL ::My point was that energy tap doesn't actually suck, and if you are using Energy Drain you should consider using MoR + Energy Tap instead. Why use Energy Drain if Energy Tap + Mantra of Recovery is more powerful? Then you have the added bonus of increasing the power of all your other skills (by reducing recharge on them as well). -- BrianG 14:17, 14 May 2007 (CDT) Relevant? "Despite the skill description saying it increases the recharge speed, it actually reduces the recharge time by 50%." - Isn't this redundant now since the actual description is "Your spells recharge 50% faster"? Luigi 17:20, 28 March 2007 (CDT) :"Recharge faster" means the recharge rate is higher. That's not what this does. --Fyren 17:23, 28 March 2007 (CDT) ::It just means that your spells recharge faster if you use them while this is active. They receive no bonus if you activate this after you have cast the spells. (If I understand correctly) Silver Sunlight 17:35, 28 March 2007 (CDT) :::But it says 50%. Recharging 100% faster is the same as recharging in half the time. This is the same discussion that's been had twice on this talk page already. --Fyren 17:44, 28 March 2007 (CDT) :::: Alright alright, sorry for bringing it up again. Luigi 16:07, 29 March 2007 (CDT) Only Revert Once User Skuld has reverted a revert on this article. The note in question follows: "Some primary mesmer builds use this skill to enhance a secondary casting profession like elementalist whose skills have long casting and/or recharge times. Even if the secondary profession attribute cannot be as high as a primary elementalist, the increased casting rate more than make up for the lesser power of the spells (and gives less opportunity to interruptions)."--Ninjatek 09:40, 12 June 2007 (CDT) :While I understand thats against policy to revert more than once, that note really is pointless and imo shouldn't be present in the notes section anyway. 76.102.172.202 16:47, 26 June 2007 (CDT) NOOOOOOOOO!!!!! Nerfed, and bad... 50% to 33%.... This is an awful update for some Domination skills like HEV!!! I LOVED HEV!!!!... Dean Harper 22:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Wow...gg Anet...this skill was never really imba anyway, the nerf was totally unneeded. Now its an FC serpent's quickness, but elite... At least they buffed some interrupts to make it not quite as bad, but still... 69.40.249.50 02:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC) Nice Job Anet, mesmers could now leave this skill behind, and I could through away lots of my mes builds..... :S--218.103.154.26 07:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC) While the Angorodon's Gaze build using this was pretty hax, this itself did not need nerfing. --Xiu Kuro 06:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC) its not a bad nerf. MoR was quite powerful. 33% is still very good. All mesmers will have something in fast casting anyway. It can still be up most of the time (unlike serpents, which has a huge recharge, requires ws (ie, no hard res, no attribute point for other skills) and an ending trigger). Compared to the alternatives (echo and arcane echo from what I see) this is still best for pvp domination mesmers. — ~Soqed Hozi~ 00:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC) Duration should be increased to justify the recharge deduction, should be maintainable at 9-10 FC. Otherwise just have a Rit cast Weapon of Quickening which is basically a longer MoR that can target allies now. ::Speaking of Weapon of Quickening... Does it stack with MoR? :::"Because recharge time reduction is capped at 50%, it is important to note that items that have a "halves skill recharge" weapon modifier do not reduce the recharge time for additional 50%, but for 27%." Unless I'm missing something, someone has some bad math. ::::Whoever posted that was making some assumptions that may or may not be fair, but its easy to see what they were saying. They assume the 33% casting time reduction for MoR is applied first and that the effects of a 'halves casting time' effect would be applied second, and that the resulting reduction would be 88% if not for the 50% cap. Thus, again assuming MoR is applied first, the 'halves casting time' effect would only contribute up to the maximum 50% reduction, or 27%. So yes, bad math, but acceptable logic. --Belker 23:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC) I hadn't logged on in a few weeks and I came back to play my Me/E... :( I used to spam Fireball and Glowing Gaze with almost no downtime, and I noticed when I came back I had a few seconds of "what the heck is going on, here?". Then I saw the time had changed from 50% to 33%. How is this balanced? I should switch to my Rit and use Weapon of Quickening instead! Here is a link to the update notes http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Game_updates/20071012#Mesmer Clay85 22:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC) LOL I removed this from the Notes: Anomaly! Despite the skill description saying it increases the recharge speed, it actually reduces the recharge time by 33%; that is, spells recharge in two-thirds the time they normally take to do so. Whoever added that doesn't understand math (and apparently this guy, http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/User:Shadowcrest, doesn't either since he tried to revert my change). The skill description, "Spells you cast recharge 33% faster", tells you exactly what the skill does. If the recharge of something is made to be faster, that increase is an inverse. For example, if someone starts attacking 20% faster, you multiply by 1''' - '''(.2), which is .8...also known as eight-tenths or 8/10. The actual result is a 25% increase in attack speed...8/10 * 1.25 = 1'. If someone is attacking 33% faster, it's a 50% increase in attack speed...'2/3 * 1.5 = 1'. Hence, this skill saying that recharge times become 33% faster does indeed mean that the recharge becomes two-thirds of what it normally is (well, actually, '.67 times the normal amount if you want to be absolutely specific). If something recharged "100% faster", that would mean the recharge is 0. I hope you've enjoyed your math lesson for the day. Zuranthium 04:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC) :Dr Needles (A few topics up) had put it in a very.. interesting way, which is why everyone had believed it. Zulu Inuoe 04:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC) ::LOL, I just read that. Too funny. Most people are bad at math. Zuranthium 06:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC) :::Math is for losers and people who don't want burger-flipping to be their life's work! [[user:Entrea Sumatae|'Entrea Sumatae']] [Talk] 06:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC) ::::Calculus was the only thing I had to look forward to when waking up on Mondays back in highschool. Zulu Inuoe 06:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC) :::::If something recharged "100% faster" it would not make the recharge 0. Everything is normally recharging at 100% of the normal recharge rate (as 100% IS normal). If something recharges 100% faster recharge speed is increased by 100%. The result of this is 200% recharge speed, also known as twice as fast as normal (which in this case would mean everything has half the recharge time) not 0. A 33% increase in recharge speed would result in 133% of the normal recharge speed, as opposed to what this skill actually does, which is closer to a 50% increase in recharge speed, or 150% of the normal recharge speed. The note is correct. Guild Wars uses percent increases differently. Darklink 03:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC) ::::::What they're saying is that it recharges 33% faster, resulting in 50% more castings. Just like 33% increase in attack speed means you hit 50% more. A simple way to put it is: Let's say you hit/cast once every 2 seconds. With a 33% modifier, you now hit/cast once every 1.33 seconds. Over a 4 second span, you normally hit/cast 2 times, but with this modifier you hit/cast 3 times. (4/2 = 2. 4/1.33 = 3)--Darksyde Never Again 17:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC) :::::::Arg! Had to fix sig--Darksyde Never Again 17:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC) ::::::::Enable raw signatures. 17:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC) :::::::::I did that, i don't know what the problem is, i've reverted my sig to the default until i figure out what it is--Darksyde Never Again 17:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC) :::I did not read everything on here. Im just going to point out, that if it says attacking 33% faster, its suppose to mean, its (original speed) * (1+.33) = new speed. If I were hitting at a rate of 1.5 times per second, and the speed increase was 33%, it would be 1.5 * (1+.33) = 1.995 times per second. If a skill recharge says it will recharge 50% faster it will be its (current recharge) / (1+.50)= new speed. Example - Skill with 2 second recharge. Skills says 33% faster recharge. 2 seconds / (1+.33)= 1.5 seconds. This makes sense when you put it into a time scenario. If it recharged every 2 seconds at first, and you had 10 second time frame, you would be able to use it 5 times. New speed of 1.5 seconds, you would use it 6.65 to 6.66 times. Which is 33% more the 5, the original pace. 5 * (1+.33) = 6.65. Thats where the 33% comes in. Skill recharge 100% faster with 10 second recharge is 10 seconds / (1+1.00) = 5 seconds. 100% being twice as fast. The skill from what I saw, should say, The time it takes to recharge is 33% less, according to the times it states in the notes; Not recharge 33% faster. Hope that helps someone, assuming I didn't make any mistakes. =) X Jstn X 14:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Recharge table Do we really need a table to tell people the exact same thing the skill description is telling them? All people have to do is take off a one third of the recharge time of whichever skill they want to check the new recharge for.Other skills like Practice Stance and Serpent's Quickness don't have a table, and in my opinion neither should this one.If we are gonna keep the table (then all the other skills that modify recharge ( and we might as well do it with casting modifying skills) should also get a table) then at least we should round the numbers because thats what GW does and its no real help if 33% less time of a skills recharge was 1.1 seconds if GW rounded the skill to 2.Durga Dido 02:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC) :I concur. (T/ ) 06:27, 19 December 2008 (UTC) Buff Idea *Make it maintainable from 10 Fast Casting onwards *For 5...25 seconds, spells you cast recharge 33% faster. Spells you cast that are interrupted recharge 66% faster. That would really give it a RECOVERY character. -- [[User:Taki_Fujiko|''Taki Fujiko]] 15:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC) : Just add Dwarwen Stability and you'll get perma MoR with r0 delver at 8 fast casting and r10 delver at 5 fast casting.Light out 14:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC) ::That's PvE only. You seem to ignore half of the game by not thinking of PvP.-- [[User:El_Nazgir|'El_Nazgir']] 11:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC) ::: >2/3 of the game* Anyways, it cannot be maintained ''because PvP exists, so making it maintainable at a rather low FC spec and give it additional benefits is insane. --- -- ( ) (talk) 12:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC) ::::No it ain't. What's wrong with MoR lasting 21 seconds at 10 FC?? It's not as if other Primaries could use it at 0 FC where it only lasts 1 second then! -- [[User:Taki_Fujiko|''Taki Fujiko]] 14:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC) :::::Yes, it is. Loldoversion/Guilt/Shame/etc. It was nerfed, and there's a reason for that. Wether secondary mesmers can use it or not ''isn't the point. --- -- ( ) (talk) 15:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC) ::::::A long time ago, MoR used to give 50% reduction in recharge, and everyone used it. There was no other elite for Mesmers. Then ANet realized that was overpowered and knocked it to 33%. After that it was never used ever again, not even in PvE. (T/ ) 15:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC) :::::::Prog and I used it to make warriors explode in AB (Wailing Weapon + Frustration + Locust's Fury/Flurry sin, using MoR to speed up the recharges), post-nerf. Good times... --- -- ( ) (talk) 15:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC) ::::::::What's your point? It's 33% now, it would be 33% after the buff. Maintainability doesn't make it overpowered in any way. The current state is just inconvenient as hell, and that's the reason no one ever uses this again. The interrupt-recharge buff would be a nice flavor addition since it's pretty hard to interrupt most mesmer casts anyways except for Diversion and Backfire. -- [[User:Taki_Fujiko|''Taki Fujiko]] 02:32, 4 March 2009 (UTC) :::::::::No, people don't use it because it was reduced from 50% to 33% (and there are better overpowered elites available now). Maintainability never mattered, since it only has a few seconds of downtime anyway. (T/ ) 02:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC) ::::::::::I am aware that they don't use it because of the nerf. But it isn't maintainable EITHER, which kills it off. If this were to be rised to duration at 9-10 FC then I'd figure out a way to use it in a build. I mean come on. It takes your ELITE. It takes your STANCE (no Distortion or Hexbreaker). It is NOT maintainable without 14 something-ridiculous FC. And outclassed in almost any aspect by Weapon of Quickening. Buff this already! With the added interrupted-recharge-buff it would come in line with the rest of these "overpowered elites available now" without the potential for abuse like in the past. That's why I suggested it. There -- [[User:Taki_Fujiko|Taki Fujiko]] 23:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC) :Weapon of Quickening is terrible, and no one uses it. :\ (mostly because it's in Communing which is trash attribute, let alone in pvp) I wasn't aware that anyone used Distortion after the nerfs, either, since you need pretty high Illusion now to not be losing massive amounts of energy. (T/ ) 00:00, 5 March 2009 (UTC) ::WoQ has the potential to own, at least in coordinated environments, it can't be removed either, MoR can with Wild Blow or Wild Strike etc. The cast time is its only real weakness true. But if it was a 1sec cast itd become way OP with a 40/40 set. -- [[User:Taki_Fujiko|Taki Fujiko]] 00:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC) :::To have any appreciable duration, you'd need to invest in Communing, which sucks cause most of those skills are extremely expensive/long recharge/5 second cast spirits. If you wanted to go a bit lower in Communing, and take Spawning Power, that could be done, but Spawning Power is terrible too... WoQ is also a weapon spell, and these days, not having Weapon of Warding, Weapon of Shadow, Resilient Weapon, etc. is bad - you could constantly overwrite them as the danger passes, of course, but that's gonna cost a hell of a lot of energy and time. Finally, there are better elites that are much more valuable both to yourself and the party, and I don't even mean just for primary Ritualists... It's just a very expensive luxury. (T/ ) 00:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC) ::::To conclude: Both skills suck major.. :D -- [[User:Taki_Fujiko|Taki Fujiko'']] 00:27, 5 March 2009 (UTC)